Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-n9wrp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-19T09:58:01.387Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of round-bale feeder design and roughage type on feed wastage in sheep feeding

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 May 2019

S. G. Kischel ,
I. Dønnem  and
K. E. Bøe
S. G. Kischel
Affiliation:
Department of Animal and Aquacultural Sciences, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, PO Box 5003, 1432 Ås, Norway
I. Dønnem
Affiliation:
Department of Animal and Aquacultural Sciences, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, PO Box 5003, 1432 Ås, Norway
K. E. Bøe*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal and Aquacultural Sciences, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, PO Box 5003, 1432 Ås, Norway
*
†E-mail: knut.boe@nmbu.no
Get access

Abstract

Feeding big round-bales in round-bale feeders are known to reduce labor and costs. However, one disadvantage is the high feed wastage. The aim of these experiments was therefore to investigate the effect of feeder design, type of roughage and size of round-bales on feed wastage in sheep. Four round-bale feeders (Diagonal Rail Sheep Circular Feeder (RD), Knarrhult Flexible Round-Bale Feeder (KR), Telemark Round-Bale Feeder (TR) and Standard Sheep Circular Ring Feeder (RV)) were distributed into four identical experimental pens and used in both experiments. In Experiment 1, two types of roughages were used; Roughage 1: low-quality, grass silage harvested at late stage of maturity with dry matter (DM) content of 560 g/kg and Roughage 2: high-quality, hay harvested at an early stage of maturity with DM content of 738 g/kg. In Experiment 2, ewes were offered hay harvested at the late stage of maturity with DM content of 766 g/kg as half and whole round-bales. In both experiments, four groups of 10 ewes of the Norwegian White breed were rotated between the experimental pens and each treatment lasted for 4 days. Feed wastage (roughage on the ground surrounding the feeder) was collected daily. The amount of feed wastage was generally high. The type of roughage (Experiment 1) had a large effect on feed wastage (P < 0.001), where Roughage 1 had a mean feed wastage of 1.88 kg DM/day per ewe and Roughage 2 had 0.48 kg DM/day per ewe. When Roughage 1 was provided, it was evident that the ewes pulled out the long fibrous stems of the feeders and left them as wastage while selecting the leaves. This was not the case for Roughage 2. When feeding half round-bales (Experiment 2), the mean feed wastage was 1.50 kg DM/day per ewe compared to 2.88 kg DM/day per ewe when feeding whole round-bales (P < 0.001). This is probably due to the ewes spending more time eating with their heads inside the feeder when fed half round-bales (P < 0.001) and thus dropped more of the potential wastage inside the feeder. Less feed inside the feeder may also be the reason that feed wastage decreased gradually from Day 1 to Day 4 in both experiments (P < 0.001). Feeder design also had a significant impact on feed wastage (P < 0.001). We conclude that providing early harvested roughage and feeding half round-bales significantly reduced feed wastage.

Keywords

ewesbalefeederforagewaste
Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 13 , Issue 10 , October 2019 , pp. 2388 - 2396
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Albright, JL 1993. Feeding behavior of dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 76, 485–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bates, D, Mächler, M, Bolker, BM and Walker, SC 2015. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software 67, 1–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buskirk, DD, Zanella, AJ, Harrigan, TM, Van Lente, JL, Gnagey, LM and Kaercher, MJ 2003. Large round bale feeder design affects hay utilization and beef cow behavior. Journal of Animal Science 81, 109–115.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eknæs, M, Randby, ÅT and Nørgaard, P 2009. Effects of stage of grass silage maturity and level of concentrate in ewes in late gestation and early lactation on feed intake, blood energy metabolites and the performance of their lambs. In Ruminant physiology, pp. 498–499. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Fox, J and Weisberg, S 2011. An (R) companion to applied regression, 2nd edition. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Retrieved on 14 May 2018 from http://socserv.socsci.mcmaster.ca/jfox/Books/Companion.Google Scholar
Hothorn, T, Bretz, F and Westfall, P 2008. Simultaneous inference in general parametric models. Biometrical Journal 50, 346–363.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lindgren, E 1979. The nutritional value of roughages determined in vivo and by laboratory methods. Report no. 45. Department of Animal Nutrition, The Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden (in Swedish).Google Scholar
Lindgren, E 1983. Nykalibrering av VOS-metoden för bestämming av energivärde hos vallfoder. Working paper. Department of Animal Nutrition, The Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden (in Swedish).Google Scholar
Martinson, K, Wilson, J, Cleary, K, Lazarus, W, Thomas, W and Hathaway, M 2012. Round-bale feeder design affects hay waste and economics during horse feeding. Journal of Animal Science 90, 1047–1055.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McMillan, ML, Wilson, KR, Golden, WC and Rakowitz, LA 2010. Influence of hay ring presence on waste in horses fed hay. The Texas Journal of Agriculture and Natural Resource 22, 82–87.Google Scholar
Mertens, DR 2002. Gravimetric determination of amylase-treated neutral detergent fiber in feeds with refluxing in beakers or crucibles: collaborative study. Journal of AOAC International 85, 1217–1240.Google ScholarPubMed
Moore, WA and Sexten, WJ 2015. Effect of bale feeder and forage on hay waste, disappearance, and sorting. The Professional Animal Scientist 31, 248–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
NRC 2007. Nutrient requirements of small ruminants. The National Academic Press, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
R Core Team 2014. R: a language and environment for statistical computing, Vienna, Austria. Retrieved on 14 May 2018 from http://www.R-project.org/ Google Scholar
Rinne, M and Nykanen, A 2000. Timing of primary growth harvest affects the yield and nutritive value of timothy-red clover mixtures. Agricultural and Food Science in Finland 9, 121–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, AM 1988. Sheep feeder design and development - Experience with 2 big-round-bale feeders for sheep. Farm Building Progress 91, 3–6.Google Scholar
Sparks, JD, Sexten, AJ, McMurphy, CP, Mourer, GL, Brown, MA, Richards, CJ and Lalman, DL 2013. Effects of bale feeder type and supplementation of monensin on hay waste, intake, and performance of beef cattle. Journal of Animal Science 9 (E-suppl. 1), 11 (abstract).Google Scholar
Sveinbjörnsson, J 1999. Effects of ad libitum silage feeding systems on ewe performance and floor wastage. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A 49, 89–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Es, AJH 1978. Feed evaluation for ruminants. I. The systems in use from May 1977-onwards in The Netherlands. Livestock Production Science 5, 331–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Soest, PJ 1994. Nutritional ecology of the ruminant, 2nd edition. Comstock Pub., Ithaca, NY, USA.Google Scholar